Category: Uncategorized

Catfish is a “documentary” on, well, the internet.

Ready for my vaguest plot summary ever?

This is Megan!

This is a “documentary” about Abby. Abby is an 8 year old girl who paints pictures, and mails them off to a guy named ‘Nev‘ in New York City, because she saw him in the paper and thought he was cute. Nev lives with two filmmakers, and because of his relationship with this wunderkind artist, they want to make a film! Begins with them getting more artwork, and it kicking ass. He even befriends Abby’s family!

First her mom, Angela, and then her older sister, Megan about 19. Facebook is great. Turns out Megan is great too. Has a lot in common with Nev, writers he own music, has her own social life. They don’t start dating, but they are interested in each other. He also gets to know her friends, her moms friends, whatever.

But one day he finds out that a song she sent him as a cover, sounds identical to a different cover found on the internet.

Roadtrip!

Yes, that is all of the plot outline you will get out of me. A lot of the point about the movie is the discovery, and journey, so even letting you know more already ruins it. Obviously I used quotation marks around documentary a lot.

Is this a real story? Maybe. Probably not. It at least has real people in it. They aren’t saying its fake. Technically the events that occurred all seem to have happened, but maybe parts were exaggerated or recreated for the purpose of a movie.

Finally, it is kind of a different movie genre. It seems to be a bit experimental, and I think it pays off. There could be a theme of fakeness in this movie, given the topic at hand, and the questionability in the film itself. If so, well done. Layers and shit.

But yeah, I liked it, even though it slowed at points near the end. If it is real, I like the level of respectability that went into it. If not well, its a pretty good fake documentary.

I had to rush out an “Irish movie” for St. Patrick’s Day, but it turns out there aren’t many of those that exist. I don’t want to watch Leap Year (at all), but it also kind of celebrates a different holiday.

So how about The Boondock Saints II: All Saint’s Day? As we have discussed before, there is no way making a sequel many years later could be a bad thing.

Also with less fucking uses of the word fuck.

The movie begins eight years after the end of the first Boondock Saints. After the final assassination, they fled to Ireland. Murphy (Norman Reedus), Connor (Sean Patrick Flanery), and their father (Billy Connolly). But after an assassination occurs in Boston by someone else trying to frame the Saints, they realize, hey, lets go stop them.

On the way they meet Romeo (Clifton Collins Jr.), a Mexican underground fighter, who serves as a nice “Rocco” replacement and joins them. They also learn that the son of the guy from the first movie is out and about, and probably set up the hit against them (Judd Nelson).

Oh yeah, wouldn’t be a Saints film without detectives trying to figure out what is going on. Now that Willem Dafoe‘s character is dead, his protege, Julie Benz, is on the case. She also comes with the same group of bumbling idiots, and tries to imitate Dafoe’s character, but you know, doesn’t do as good.

But yeah. Back to Boston, fix their name, assassination highjinks / very lucky, avoiding the law, and stopping a crime boss. End scene!

Sorry, there is no good pictures on the Internet from the sequel.

I realize not everyone liked the first Saints movie, but it does have a huge cult following, and made bank on DVD sales, so that is why the sequel eventually happened. And I think everyone who was hoping for magic let out a collective sigh of disappointment.

While it does seem to provide more of the same stuff we should like, it also feels, just not the same. It is hard to describe why it isn’t as good, because then I’d have to explain why I thought the first saints was good. I guess I thought it was clever, and going against stereotypes for movies like it (famous rope scene and all), but just didn’t find it present in the sequel.

Benz was pretty bad too, trying to do the exact same thing as Dafoe, but not being Dafoe it just seemed like a parody. I already said that, but it needed reinforcement.

Reinforcement is a weird word.

Let Me In is the American Remake of Let The Right One In, a highly rated Swedish movie. I do own Let The Right One In, on Blu-Ray, just haven’t seen it yet. I kept putting it off for no reason, and meant to review/watch it before the American version, but at this point, the American version had to come now with my opening to watch it closing.

But if Hank Hill has anything to say on the matter, he’d say if a foreign film was any good, they’d remake it for America. While kind of an insult, it is kind of also a compliment. So I expected good things with this movie.

Good, probably creepy, things with this movie.

Owen (Kodi Smit-McPhee) is a small young, probably Minnesotan boy. I am guessing the state, but there is snow a lot, and these guys go out to play hockey on a lake once, and Minnesota has a lot of lakes. He is weirder, so he gets picked on by the bullies at school, lead by Kenny (Dylan Minnette). His parents are also getting divorced, so he pretty much only lives with his mom.

Then, one night, a girl, Abby (Chloe Grace Moretz) and her dad (Richard Jenkins) move in next door. Abby tells him they cannot be friends, but they do so anyway. Even talking in Morse code through the walls. The bully problem is getting worse, so she tells him to defend himself and she will help. He ends up fighting back, with a quick swing, and manages to slice Kenny’s ear open…right at the same time a body is found under the ice!

If you didn’t know, Abby and her dad are vampires. The dad character tends to go out and feed and bring back blood for Abby. When one encounter goes wrong, the dad is left badly burned and in the hospital, with the detective (Elias Koteas) very confused and suspicious of everyone. Eventually the little girl.

The ending of the movie includes Owen trying to finally, maybe, overcome the bullies, the realization of vampire-ness, escaping the detective and more. I kind of want to spoil stuff, but wont this time.

Vampires be crazy.

This (remake of a foreign movie) was so very good! It was deep and felt heartfelt the whole time. Kind of a slow paced movie, it is also equally about bullying as it is about vampires, I’d like to think. And yet everyone does so good. Owen was also the little kid in The Road, so he knows a thing or two about being in horrifying situations and not freaking the heck out.

Chloe also did a great job. Despite the fact that their characters were “going steady” eventually in the movie, and that vampires are usually all about sex, I never felt like a creepy “oh god, pedophilia?? (or necro)” thought in my head, even in one “bed” scene. Mad about quotation marks yet? Too bad. It all felt more like child curiosity, even though Abby is a lot older than Owen.

It also didn’t try to change vampire mythos. All of it seems to be based on the facts we knew growing up, which is all everyone wants. Most new vampire movies try to change them. But in this movie, sunlight is bad, holy water is bad, need blood, can’t go into residence without being invited (thus the title), and etc. Since that stuff doesn’t have to be explained, the movie can just be enjoyed and felt. Pretty much, this is like Flipped, but less for kids.

Speaking of movies based on comics…

Hey look, Dylan Dog: Dead Of Night!

Something I have never heard of before this movie. So must be a lower title, maybe an indie thing. Eh.

The scene after this was pretty hot.

Dylan Dog (Brandon Routh, or that guy who helped ruin the Superman franchise (Go Marvel!)) is a detective who helps work with the supernatural creatures. Werewolves, vampires, ghosts, zombies, whatever. Or at least he used to be.

Now with his assistant Marcus (Sam Huntington), he is a normal detective. That is until a girl (Anita Briem) brings him a case pulling him back in. He stopped doing it because vampires were mad, he killed a bunch of elders (accidentally?). This leads him to werewolves, vampires, ghosts, zombies. Kind of everything I mentioned earlier I guess.

Also, early on his partner dies, and becomes a zombie. Yay zombie! One of the main vampires (and thus bad people) is played by Taye Diggs. Eventually Dylan Dog will figure it all out, and save the day. Also, his partner is a zombie.

Zombies can come out of morgues all like, “What? What happened? I’m not dead, asshole.”

So uhh, as a comedy horror action thing, I found it to be lacking hard in at least two of the categories. Apparently these comics are big in Italy, and pretty much everyone has read at least one. I heard they also hate this movie, because it is nothing like the comic which also serves as a form of social commentary. That sounds pretty cool actually, because I didn’t see any social comentary in this movie.

I only found the friends realization that he is a Zombie funny, and coming to terms with that. Nothing was really scary. So mostly it was an action / detective field, where even the main character wasn’t the real hero by the end. Let all the other people do the “morally questionable” parts, and leave himself free of morals. How boring.

So yeah, what a yawner.

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is the sequel to the critically acclaimed movie, Wall Street, just set and made about 23 years later. I mean, why not, clearly that is a long enough time to wait for a sequel. No one likes them rushed. It might appeal to a completely new crowd, but as long as they don’t do stupid things with the characters, then it should be good right?

It should be noted that I watched Wall Street for the first time a day before watching the sequel, and loved the original. Charlie Sheen and his dad did a great job, as did Michael Douglas.

Why Martin keeps playing the dad character to his actual sons roles, I will never know.
Must have gained a lot of false memories while parenting.

The movie begins with Michael Douglas’ character getting out of jail. What? Wall Street didn’t end with him getting jailed. I guess that happened in the 20 some year break.

The main character of this movie is actually Shia LaBeouf, which makes total sense, why not. He is dating Carey Mulligan, the daughter of Douglas, and isn’t in to the ridiculous wealth thing, like her dad. Greed is bad she says! He is also a young stock broker, for a dying company lead by Frank Langella. The economic crash has already occurred, from 2008 or whatever, so they are hoping for a bailout and it isn’t looking likely.

Pseudo-threats, lead by Josh Brolin, lead Frank to kill himself, leaving his company and Shia’s future in question! So he lied to some people and hurt Brolin where it matters, his wallet. This made Brolin like his balls, and hire him. At the same time, Shia is looking to his soon to be father in law, for help, advice, as he likes him (unlike his fiance).

Eventually people screw over other people. Brolin also was the man responsible for imprisoning Douglas, apparently. Then the new bad guy gets what is coming for him, and Douglas’ character turns over a new leaf and everyone has a happy ending.

Note the smiles.

I hated this sequel. First off, it was kind of boring. Second off, it played off of post crash wall street, instead of during crash wall street, a much more exciting time. When I tried to get people to watch Margin Call, I was told it reminded them of this movie, but they are “nothing alike”. In terms of what they are overall about and how good they are.

Thirdly, they killed Michael Douglas’ character. Not like a death, but what he was, and how he was most of the movie, they decided to ignore all of his life and have him change last moment, and do something unlike anything he has done before. That shit was stupid. I am all for redeeming characters, that is a big problem I have with Toy Story 3, but the way they did it was out of no where, unbelievable, and just gross to look at. My eyes and ears hurt when I saw it.

Charlie Sheen’s character was in the movie briefly, but it didn’t seem like his character either.

Finally, this movie was more confusing than the first one. They did a poor job of explaining everything that was happening, and it took forever to catch up. From all the people who became stock market folks cause of the first movie, this one might cause less people to choose the field. Huh, maybe that is a positive then?

Generally when you sit down to watch a movie (like Jack and Jill), knowing that it was nominated for the most Razzies of the films that year, you might go in thinking it will be bad. Which is understandable, can’t avoid it. If you haven’t heard of the Razzies, you might have guessed it by the the many commercial previews for it, that looked bad.

Well, yeah. It was. But how bad? A lot of the times bad movies by Hollywood standards are considered rage inducing bad, with people carrying their pitchforks to take down the director, but they are also fueled mostly by people who hadn’t seen the movie. That will always happen, forever, because the general reasoning is “No, why would I want to watch that? Its bad!” The whole reason for this website, pretty much, to fight that behavior.

So let us all go watch supposedly bad movies anyways, just to make sure its not a conspiracy!

So Adam Sandler plays Jack, a sort of successful commercial director/advertisement agency thing. Thanksgiving is coming up, also known as the annual visit from his twin sister, Jill. Why do they look identical minus hair and stuff? No idea, shits impossible. She used to live in the Bronx with their mom, but now that she is dead, it has been only her and her bird. So she is lonely. That is most of the plot really, his twin sister is annoying, but just trying to be less lonely and sad.

Jack’s family involves his wife (Katie Holmes), his daughter (Elodie Tougne), and adopted son (Rohan Chand).

His boss is played by Tim Meadows, and his atheist assistant is Nick Swardson. The big problem they are facing is that Dunken Donuts wants to pull away from their company, their biggest client,if they cannot get Al Pacino to be in their new commercial product line for a “Dunkacino”. But that is Al Pacino, there is no way they could get him to do something so silly. [I think I just got that the commercial is a metaphor for this movie?]

Al Pacino, playing himself, falls in love with Jill, who keeps making excuses to stay around, and eventually Jack realizes he can use Jill to land Al Pacino (Even if she finds him repulsive). Eventually everyone learns to love each other, and yay family.

It makes me cry a bit knowing this is a real scene in a real movie.

So, I did find parts of the film funny. The ending with Jack and Pacino watching the commercial and talking about how it must be destroyed, I assume is about the movie, and was funny. The opening and beginning had actual twins talking about their lives (I assume the stories weren’t made up) which was neat. Jack also had some nice lines at his sisters expense early on in the film. Obviously Sandler as Jill was annoying and horrendous. So he pretty much ruined all of his jokes, by having her react to them in the manner that she did.

But besides that,I thought Katie Holmes was the worst part of this movie. She felt so fake, and did just a bad job at appearing concerned and caring. Seriously. Her facial expressions were the worst. Al Pacino as himself also hit a nerve. Sometimes he was amusing, but his deep fascination with Jill, on a level compared to stalking wasn’t as good as his general anger towards other things in Hollywood.

Lot of cameos in this movie, and thought Norm MacDonald‘s was the best.

So worst movie ever? Nah. Bad? Sure, definitely. Would have been the same result if it wasn’t twins and Adam Sandler just played the role of an annoying sister. Well, at least kids will like it.

know why Jennifer’s Body sucked? I mean, it was written by the same person who did Juno (and Young Adult)! But these two movies were also directed by Jason Reitman, who passed on Jennifer’s Body, and also directed things like Up In The Air and Thank You For Smoking.

Director beats Writer. I think Science just proved that?

It’s the Hello Kitty shirt that should really speak to you here.

Charlize Theron is a very successful writer in NYC! And by very successful, I mean she has written books as part of a series, but didn’t create the series. Although he name is on the inside flap as the author, the series creator still gets front cover status. It is found in the “Young Adult” section of a book store. Oh well, still cool. Especially since she is a girl from a small town in Minnesota, where most people just stay put and live there their whole lives. Yeah!

But now she is getting depressed (and may have been an alcoholic for some time). She just broke up with her long term manfriend, and her high school boyfriend is now married just had his first kid. And the series is ending, so she has to write the final book, and then figure out what else to do with her life. Seems like a good time to visit her home town! Oh, and plot to win her old love back. Who cares if he is married and has child?

First she meets Matt (Patton Oswalt), a kid who she barely knew in high school, who was taken to the woods and had his legs and dick beaten by jocks with crowbars, for being gay. But once they found out he wasn’t gay, it was no longer called a hate crime and they barely got into trouble. He says her plan is stupid. But she tries anyways to recreate how she looked in high school, and how they would do young people things, like getting drunk at a bar! But Buddy (Patrick Wilson) doesn’t want to.

But she keeps trying. Even going out to to the naming ceremony for the son. Yes, she does it all in front of his wife (Elizabeth Reaser). Even goes to the wives local garage band concert. Questionable motives indeed.

But can she succeed and win over her former lover? Or will the whole town think she is crazy?

Life is simpler in Minnesota. Phones with cords.

So, the dark comedy part of this tag means pretty dark. Minus the death elements in a lot of dark comedies, but man. This humor is based off of extreme awkwardness, meanness, and past situations you didn’t see coming. Also the uncomfortableness of the main character being a depressed drunk, who does seemingly crazy actions.

I wasn’t surprised by what happened at the end, it made sense, but I was surprised at the way it happened. Which was the totally uncomfortable way. (Word of the the day, uncomfortable).

I thought Charlize Theron (an actress I normally don’t care for) did a great job in her crisis, and truly believing all of the crazy things that she did. Thought it was her destiny to get back with her Buddy, and wouldn’t let logic or reason get in the way. Patton Oswalt did a pretty good job, most of his roles are comic relief funny fat guy, but his character was super damn important in this movie, and had a lot more subtle humor.

When I thought about The Adventures of Tintin as a crazy CGI movie, I didn’t think much of it. I thought it would probably cost a lot of money and not do so well. I also knew that he probably wouldn’t go to Africa, given his old comics being racist and stuff.

Basically what you need to know about Tintin is he is a guy with a dog, that goes on adventures. He is a journalist, which means he gets around, investigates, and can also solve mysteries. He also knows how to do tons of things, like pilot all types of transportation sources. He probably speaks a lot of languages too, but doesn’t show off. What a well guy

Minus that guys nose, look at that “realism”!

Tintin (Jamie Bell) is just hanging out in Paris. The first time we seem him is actually hilarious. But I don’t want to spoil that joke for you. While looking for his dog, he finds a model Ship made by Sir Francis Haddock (Obvious reference to Drake is obvious), who was a famous sailor and rich, and had a ship named a Unicorn. Immediately after purchase, a guy tries to buy it from him (with a warning), then Rackham (Daniel Craig), an old rich guy tries to do the same. He seems evil, and this is a CGI movie, so he is.

Eventually Tintin finds a note stuk in the ship, written in another language and a poem. Eventually he also finds out that Rackham has a ship identical to his with a different note. Can these notes combined lead to a secret buried treasure?

Shooting, and kidnapping, and escaping happen, and Tintin finds himself on a boat (motherfucker, on a boat) where he meets Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis). The captain of the baot who is locked away in his room after a mutiny, with nothing but his rum. They eventually escape and realize there is a third clue. Also, clearly the Captain is a descendant Sir Francis, and wants to help out Tintin. But they have to race against Rackham and his crew, who want to stop them, and find the treasure first.

There is also Thomson (Nick Frost) and Thompson (Simon Pegg), two very similar bumbling constables, who want to help Tintin. I think?

Seriously. No idea if they are out to get him, or help him, or if all of their success is stealing the work he does and captures people?

Did you like that shitty plot description? I skipped a lot and left a lot out because A LOT OF THINGS happen in this movie. Holy crap, is there action.

Oddly enough this film is PG. The Captain is drunk 90% of his screen time, and one of the major plot points in the desert is that he gets sober and can’t remember certain things so they have to find him alcohol. What!? Also lots of guns. People in the movie die to guns, even. No blood spatter. But shot. In a pg movie! And smoking! I guess you can do anything in CGI eh?

I liked it all though. It was crazy to watch. Chase scenes, different countries, and a pirate hallucination that was super epic.

My one big complaint, which is true of the comic too (and thus true to the film?) is the dog. The dog just felt like one giant Deus Ex Machina, again and again. The dog was responsible for most of the plot advancement, randomly running away, randomly finding things etc. Just felt lazy that it kept happening over and over.

But really, it was a pretty nifty adventure that Tintin guy went on.

I hadn’t expected to watch two movies where Channing Tatum played a pivotal role in it so close to each other. Guy just has a face that bugs me, so I usually avoid his stuff. And by pivotal role, I mean the main character this time, damn.

Yeah. That’s the face right there.

This story is about the Roman Empire, fucking up Britain. Back in the 100s, when trying to Conquer Britain, a Roman Legion was lost and their flag standard, an Eagle, was lost with them. The leader of that division was the father of Marcus Aguila (Tatum), so there was some shame on his family. Since then he has become a commander himself, and has been sent to lead the troops at Hadrian’s Wall, a wall in GB south of where the legion had since been missing.

On like his first night, they get attacked and raided, but thanks to him they win. Too bad he gets fucked up. Oh well, honorable discharge and sent back home to his uncle (Donald Sutherland). Unfortunately he still hasn’t cleared his dads name. Gah! Once he feels better (albeit still crippled), he heads back to the wall with his slave and confidant, Esca (Jamie Bell), to go North of the wall in their own small group and try and find the eagle.

They have to deal with the natives (Britain was very uncivilized at the time), the lost legion, and friendship strains. Aww.

“Bitch don’t you know you’re about to get cut!?” – Audience member

This is a pretty gritty feeling movie. And it feels like a movie set way back when. Both were probably obvious I guess? Either way, it took me awhile to really care about the main two characters. Having the big going home after the first battle, downtime, relaxation thing, hurt the flow of the film for me. I think it would have been better if he just recovered at the wall, got discharged and instead of going home, going straight into the wild to search for the Eagle. His slave friend could have came to pick him up, or whatever.

Fighting was cool though. I could actually understand most of the fight that occurred at night, which is a great bonus. A lot of movie like to do shit at night just so they don’t have to make things obvious. Thought the ending was pretty swell too.

But there were also larger more boring moments that kept taking me out of the story line, weirdly enough. My favorite moment was when Aguila saved Esca from the gladiator arena. Such a small moment, but just really really liked it.

Its amazing how non observant I am in the real world. I recognized all the names on the movie Stone, but I must have gotten lazy after the first two and wandered off each time. Had I known this was a movie with Edward Norton, I would have watched this much sooner.

Doesn’t mean it is good. Just means I like his acting.

And his hair style choices. I have always wanted corn rows. Edward Norton is now saying I should try it out.

The story is actually about Jack (Robert De Niro), a parole officer who is a few weeks from retirement (of course). His next and last case involves the prisoner who wants to be called Stone (Norton), and has been in Prison for about five years in a nine year sentence. He claims to be on a new path, spiritually, and got put in prison for arson. He also describes his wife, Lucy (Milla Jovovich), as an Alien from another planet due to how hot she is. She is depicted as someone super active, sexually, and a elementary school teacher. Wooo.

Eventually, through some prodding, Lucy finally convinces Jack to meet up with him to talk about releasing her husband. And she seduces them and sex happens. Jack, who has never broken a law in his life, and never cheated before, but isn’t necessarily a good guy, just good at seeing through bull shit. He has been married for 40 years (to Frances Conroy), but the marriage is loveless and stale, mostly his fault, and she feels trapped in the house.

Eventually Stone gets out of jail, per Jack’s permission. BUT WILL I MEAN DIRE CONSEQUENCES?

Also, Milla is a lot more naked in this movie than you’d have guessed.

So, what starts off as a movie in the thriller suspense genre, at some point turns into straight drama, sort of spiritual based, sort of fate based. Sort of something else. I was definitely interested in the beginning of the film, but found myself bored and not liking the way it was going.

The acting in it, don’t get me wrong, it was good. Even Milla. But the story? That felt weak. Not only that, but unfinished to me, and then at the end, pointless.

I like there to be a point to my time watching movies, and I feel like I wasted 2 hours. Good acting is not the only important thing to a good movie.